FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Christopher Cooper has ruled that the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which supervises immigration judges, properly redacted personal information about the judges from 767 complaints under Exemption 6 (invasion of privacy) in response to a request by the American Immigration Lawyers Association. Agreeing with the agency's redactions, Cooper noted that "this is precisely the balance [between public interest and individual privacy] that EOIR has struck here: producing the nonconfidential portions of the complaint records but redacting the confidential data contained within them." AILA argued that some of the immigration judges had already been publicly identified. But Cooper pointed out that "the circuit court opinions [identifying certain immigration judges] and associated news reports involve just a small sample of IJs and complaints against them. The public availability of a smattering of complaints and the names of the limited number of individual IJs associated with them does not eliminate the privacy interests of all the remaining IJs." AILA also claimed that because IJs were entrusted to make life-changing decisions their privacy should be diminished. Cooper disagreed, noting that "the Court sees no good reason why the substantial privacy interests that IJs have in their personal information should be given any less weight than was given to the interests of the federal employees in [prior cases]. The fact that IJs are unionized, non-supervisory career civil servants selected through competitive vacancy announcements as opposed to political appointees or senior managers, further bolsters this conclusion." The agency withheld as non-responsive, information in complaint files about other complaints because those were disclosed separately. Cooper observed that "information that 'concerned other complaints against the immigration judge or other immigration judges' plainly falls within the scope of AILA's request for 'all complaints filed against immigration judges.' As a result, the Court concludes that this information is responsive to AILA's request and EOIR must release any material withheld from complaint records on that basis." Cooper rejected AILA's contention that the complaints fell within the parameters of subsection (a)(2) because they constituted final opinions requiring the agency to make them publicly available. He pointed out that "while prior substantiated complaints against an IJ may lead to progressively harsher discipline in response to subsequent complaints about him or her, they have no binding effect on the public at large or even other EOIR officials."
Issues: Exemption 6 - Invasion of privacy

FOIA Project Annotation: Judge Christopher Cooper has ruled the Executive Office for Immigration Review can continue to claim that certain information is non-responsive to the American Immigration Lawyers Association's request for records pertaining to complaints against immigration judges. EOIR had originally withheld some records as non-responsive based on its claim that the redactions made it easier to understand the complaint files. Cooper had told the agency it could not rely on that claim and would need to reprocess the material. As a result, the agency disclosed 568 pages in full and 57 pages in part, but continued to withhold portions of 64 pages as non-responsive. AILA argued that Cooper had forbidden the agency from claiming records were non-responsive. But Cooper pointed out that his order only addressed "material withheld from complaint records on the basis that withholding non-responsive information about other complaints made it easier to understand the subject complaint file. The Court never meant to suggest that EOIR could not redact any material as 'non-responsive.'" Cooper noted that according to EOIR the "material discusses totally irrelevant topics such as office cleaning, vacation plans, and medical condition of EOIR staff. Thus, so long as the information in question 'is clearly and without any doubt unrelated to the subject of the request' and its redaction will not interfere with AILA's ability to understand or contexualize the responsive material, EOIR is not obligated to produce it." AILA also argued that allowing the agency to make exemption claims at this point was contrary to Maydak v. Dept of Justice, 218 F.3d 760 (D.C. Cir. 2000), where the D.C. Circuit ruled agencies must make all their exemption claims at the same time. Cooper explained that here "EOIR had no obligation to process material it had designated as non-responsive prior to summary judgment briefing and, understandably, did not do so. Once the Court found a portion of this material to be responsive, the agency was certainly within its rights to process it for relevant FOIA exemptions, as it would for any other material it would produce in response to a FOIA request."
Issues: Adequacy - Search

RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 6/6/2013. Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 7/6/2013. (Murray, Julie) (Entered: 06/11/2013)

2013-07-08

7

Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint by EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Guzman, Javier) (Entered: 07/08/2013)

2013-07-08

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) granting 7 Defendants' Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time [to] Respond to Complaint. The defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint by August 9, 2013. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on 07/08/2013. (lcbah2) (Entered: 07/08/2013)

2013-07-09

Set/Reset Deadlines: Answer to the complaint due by 8/9/2013. (tg, ) (Entered: 07/09/2013)

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) In accordance with the 9 Joint Status Report, the Court enters the following SCHEDULING ORDER to govern future proceedings in this matter: The Defendants' Vaughn Index is due by October 31, 2013, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is due by December 2, 2013, Plaintiff's Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is due by January 16, 2014, Defendants' Reply and Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is due by February 6, 2014, and Plaintiff's Reply is due by February 27, 2014. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on 10/22/2013. (lcbah2) (Entered: 10/22/2013)

2013-10-23

Set/Reset Deadlines: Vaughn Index due by 10/31/2013. Summary Judgment motions due by 12/2/2013; Cross-Motion and Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 1/16/2014; Opposition to Cross-Motion and Reply to Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 2/6/2014; Reply to Opposition to Cross Motion due by 2/27/2014. (tg, ) (Entered: 10/23/2013)

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) Upon consideration of the Defendants' 11 Unopposed Motion for Extension of the Court's Scheduling Order, the Court amends the SCHEDULING ORDER as follows: (1) by October 31, 2013 the Defendants shall release the Immigration Judge Complaint Database; (2) by November 12, 2013, the Defendants shall release the first interim release of at least 100 complaint files; (3) by November 19, 2013, the Defendants shall release a Vaughn index for information withheld or redacted from those complaint files; (4) by December 3, 2013, the Defendants shall release the second interim release of at least 100 complaint files; (5) by December 10, 2013, the Defendants shall release a Vaughn index for information withheld or redacted from those complaint files; (6) by December 23, 2013, the Defendants shall release the third interim release of at least 100 complaint files; (7) By December 30, 2013, the Defendants shall release a Vaughn index for information withheld or redacted from those complaint files; (8) by January 9, 2014, the Defendants shall release a fourth interim release of at least 100 complaint files; (9) by January 16, 2014, the Defendants shall release a Vaughn index for information withheld or redacted from those complaint files; (10) by January 23, 2014, the Defendants shall release the final interim release of remaining complaint files and any other responsive records; (11) by January 30, 2014, the Defendants shall release a Vaughn index for information withheld or redacted from those complaint files; (12) by February 13, 2014, Defendants shall file any motion for summary judgment; (13) by March 14, 2014, the Plaintiff shall file any Opposition or Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment; (14) by April 4, 2014, the Defendants shall file any Reply; and (15) by April 25, 2014, the Plaintiff shall file any Reply. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on 10/29/2013. (lcbah2) (Entered: 10/29/2013)

MINUTE ORDER (paperless) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART the defendants' 12 Motion for Extension of the Court's Scheduling Order. Upon consideration of the dates on which the parties agree and disagree, and the reasons for any disagreement, the Court amends the SCHEDULING ORDER, per agreement of the parties, as follows: (1) by February 28, 2014, the defendants shall release a sixth interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index; (2) by March 25, 2014, the defendants shall release a seventh interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index; (3) by April 17, 2014, the defendants shall release an eighth interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index; (4) on April 22, 2014, the defendants shall release Vaughn indices for any previous release where the Vaughn index was not provided and revised Vaughn indices for any non-conforming previously provided Vaughn indices; (5) by May 16, 2014, the defendants shall file any motion for summary judgment; (6) by June 16, 2014, the plaintiff shall file any opposition or cross-motion for summary judgment; (7) by July 11, 2014, the defendants shall file any reply; and (8) by August 7, 2014, the plaintiff shall file any reply. In addition, by May 2, 2014, the parties shall (a) submit a joint status report detailing the status of the review of responsive records that have been referred to other Department of Justice components, and (b) meet and confer to narrow issues for summary judgment. Insofar as the plaintiff's 13 Partial Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Extend the Court's Scheduling Order requests an order regarding the Vaughn indices, the sufficiency of the contents of the Vaughn indices will be considered along with any dispositive motions. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on February 12, 2014. (lcbah2) (Entered: 02/12/2014)

2014-02-12

Set/Reset Deadlines: defendants release of sixth interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index due 2/28/2014; Defendants release of seventh interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index due by 3/25/2014; Defendants release of eighth interim release of at least 100 complaint files and a corresponding Vaughn index due by 4/17/2014; Defendants release of Vaughn indices for any previous release where the Vaughn index was not provided and revised Vaughn indices for any non-conforming previously provided Vaughn indices due by 4/22/2014. Joint Status Report due by 5/2/2014. Summary Judgment motion due by 5/16/2014; Cross-Motion and Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 6/16/2014; Opposition to Cross-Motion and Reply to Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment due by 7/11/2014; Reply to Opposition to Cross Motion due by 8/7/2014. (tg, ) (Entered: 02/12/2014)

MINUTE ORDER granting in part and denying in part 15 Motion for Scheduling Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that all components of Defendant Department of Justice review by May 30, 2014 records sent to them by the Executive Office for Immigration Review for consultation or referral; it is FURTHER ORDERED that defendants either release such records or provide a Vaughn index/declaration justifying those records withholding by June 11, 2014; it is FURTHER ORDERED that the parties submit by June 11, 2014 a joint status report on any remaining records that were sent to non-DOJ agencies for consultation and that have not been released to plaintiff. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 5/22/2014. (lccrc1, ) (Entered: 05/22/2014)

MINUTE ORDER granting 22 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time. It is further ORDERED that Defendant's reply is due on or before July 11, 2014 and Plaintiff's reply is due on or before August 7, 2014. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 6/23/2014. (lccrc1, ) (Entered: 06/23/2014)

MINUTE ORDER: Defendant's reply is due on or before July 18, 2014 and Plaintiff's reply is due on or before August 14, 2014. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 7/17/2014. (lccrc1, ) (Entered: 07/17/2014)

ORDER: For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 16 is granted in part and denied in part. The Court grants Defendants' Motion as it relates to the redaction of immigration judges' personal identifying information and as it relates to the publication of immigration judge complaint resolutions. The Court denies Defendants' Motion as it relates to the redaction as non-responsive of other information in the complaint files on the basis that withholding non-responsive information about other complaints made it easier to understand the subject complaint file. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment 20 is granted in part and denied in part. The Court denies Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to the redaction of immigration judges' personal identifying information and as it relates to the publication of immigration judge complaint resolutions. The Court grants Plaintiff's Motion as it relates to the redaction as non-responsive of other information in the complaint files on the basis that withholding non-responsive information about other complaints made it easier to understand the subject complaint file. It is further ORDERED that Defendant shall release any material withheld from complaint records on the basis that withholding non-responsive information about other complaints made it easier to understand the subject complaint file. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 12/24/2014. (lccrc2, ) (Entered: 12/24/2014)

2015-04-06

MINUTE ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS the parties to submit a joint status report on or before April 13, 2015 indicating whether further proceedings will be necessary in this case. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 4/6/2015. (lccrc2, ) (Entered: 04/06/2015)

MINUTE ORDER: The Court hereby ORDERS the parties to submit a joint status report on or before April 30, 2015. Should any additional motions be necessary in this case, the parties will address them and propose a briefing schedule in the status report. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 4/15/2015. (lccrc2, ) (Entered: 04/15/2015)

MOTION to Enforce or, in the Alternative, to Clarify the Court's December 24, 2014, Order and Opinion by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Julie A. Murray and Supporting Exhibits, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Murray, Julie) (Entered: 04/30/2015)

2015-05-01

MINUTE ORDER: Defendants shall file their opposition to 35 Plaintiff's MOTION to Enforce or, in the Alternative, to Clarify the Court's December 24, 2014, Order and Opinion by May 14, 2015, and Plaintiff shall file a reply by May 21, 2015. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 5/1/2015. (lccrc2, ) (Entered: 05/01/2015)

REPLY to opposition to motion re 35 MOTION to Enforce or, in the Alternative, to Clarify the Court's December 24, 2014, Order and Opinion filed by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION. (Murray, Julie) (Entered: 05/21/2015)

ORDER: Upon consideration of the parties joint stipulation (Doc. 41), and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f), it is herebyORDERED that, for the reasons stated in this Courts December 24, 2014, Memorandum Opinion, and June 23, 2015, Order, summary judgment is granted to defendants and denied to plaintiff with respect to redactions under FOIA Exemption 6 from records subject to referral or consultation with other Department of Justice (DOJ) components or non-DOJ agencies (referral/consultation records); ORDERED that summary judgment is granted to plaintiff and denied to defendants, under the same rationale set forth in this Courts December 24, 2014, Memorandum Opinion and June 23, 2015, Order with respect to redactions marked as non-responsive in the referral/consultation records; ORDERED that plaintiffs First, Second, and Third Claims for Relief in the Complaint are dismissed as moot. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 7/1/2015. (tcr) (Entered: 07/02/2015)

2015-07-08

43

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Seek Fees and Costs by AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Murray, Julie) (Entered: 07/08/2015)

2015-07-10

MINUTE ORDER granting 43 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Seek Fees and Costs; it is hereby ORDERED that the plaintiff may move for an award of attorneys fees and any related nontaxable expenses and file a bill of costs up to and including 60 days after the deadline to notice an appeal or, if an appeal is taken, up to and including 60 days after issuance of the mandate by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Signed by Judge Christopher R. Cooper on 7/10/2015. (tcr) (Entered: 07/10/2015)

Transmission of the Notice of Appeal, Order Appealed, and Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals fee was paid this date 7/15/15 re 44 Notice of Appeal to DC Circuit Court,. (td) (Entered: 07/16/2015)